"Fraud" may also be expressed in omission, i.e., silence and concealment of facts that were required to be disclosed, as well as partial presentation of the facts, which may in certain circumstances constitute a false representation.
As for the mental element of the offense, it is necessary that the perpetrator be aware of the nature of his behavior, the existence of the relevant circumstances, as well as criminal thought of a reckless nature, at least, of the possibility of the occurrence of the outcome.
and as held inCriminal Appeal 2955/94 State of Israel v. Nahum Dori, IsrSC 50(4) 573 "Hence, the offense of fraudulent receipt is contingent on the fraudster's knowledge that the claim is false; in anticipation of the possibility that the false claim will lead to the deception in an act or omission, and in an attitude of at least frivolity towards this possibility... And when it comes to 'aggravating circumstances', the offense is contingent on the fraudulent awareness of the existence of these circumstances (ibid., at p. 580).
In other words, the perpetrator must be aware that this is a false claim and that there is a possibility of receiving something by virtue of that claim, and with regard to the result, it is required that the perpetrator act at least recklessly, that is, indifferent or recklessly towards the possibility of receiving something as a result of his act of fraud. In addition, awareness is required of the existence of a causal connection between the act of fraud and the receipt of the matter. In accordance with the ruling, it is not necessary that the mental element be formed at the beginning of the execution of the transaction, and it is possible that the same mental element will be formed during it, as long as the execution is not completed. Thus it was stated inCriminal Appeal 555/77 Rabi v. State of Israel, IsrSC 32(2) 762, at p. 776:
"Therefore, if the appellants knew, at the time that the maps were delivered by them or by one of them to Gilo, that the area of the entire plot did not exceed 30 dunams, and nevertheless they took steps to proceed with the realization of the transaction, on the basis of which it was assumed that it was a plot of 60 dunams, they committed a fraudulent offense" (and see also Criminal Appeal 752/90 Barzel v. State of Israel, IsrSC 46(2) 539; and Dan Bein's article "The Social Interest Protected by the Offense of Fraud", Hapraklit 26:85 [1970] 85).